Civil society environmental advocates are questioning the recent decision of Environment Secretary Roy Cimatu lifting the suspension in the issuance of SAPA certificates to individuals, groups and/or corporations seeking to develop areas of the protected areas of the country for various “special uses”.
SAPA stands for “special use agreement in protected area”. Special uses include the establishment of ecotourism facilities, campsites, aqua culture, agro-forestry projects and tree plantations. SAPAs may also be issued to corporations setting up communication facilities, erecting transmission lines, building irrigation canals/waterways, and carving “rights-of-way” for roads and various infra projects.
The SAPA issuance program was suspended in 2011 or at about the same time that the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), under the Aquino Administration, launched the “National Greening Program” (NGP), an ambitious program seeking to reforest the country through the planting of 1.5 billion trees.
The “special uses” or SAPAs can cover large swaths of the nation’s protected areas. A 2015 publication of the DENR’s Biodiversity Management Bureau says that the country has around 240 “protected areas” under the National Integrated Protected Areas System or NIPAS. These protected areas have an aggregate area of 5.5 million hectares, or roughly one-sixth of the country’s total land area of 30 million hectares. These protected areas constitute the nation’s last bulwark against the steady onslaught of deforestation and environmental degradation.
They are also heavenly gifts to the Philippines. Among the PA’s are the following: Batanes Protected Landscape and Seascape, Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park, Mts. Banahaw-San Cristobal Protected Landscape, Mt. Makiling Forest Reserve, Tubbataha Reefs Natural Park, Mt. Kanlaon Natural Park, Central Cebu Protected Landscape, Mt. Malindang Natural Park, Mt. Kitanglad Natural Park and Mt. Apo Natural Park.
The criticism of environmentalists is that the lifting of the suspension is based on a poor premise: the government is not earning enough from these protected areas. According to one study cited by the Biodiversity Management Bureau, the issuance of SAPAs to interested private corporations can raise billions to the government’s coffers. And yet, these areas have been declared “protected” precisely because they are supposed to be “protected” from the exploitation and commercialization of the forests, in order to preserve and nurture the natural environment.
Imagine if the Ayalas, Sys, Aboitizes, Consunjis, Villars and other big business families shall all be allowed to establish their respective big-ticket “eco-tourism” or agro-forestry or plantation projects in the 240 or so protected areas! Once these big business families are able to set up these projects, what will be the shape of development in these protected areas? Imagine how commerce shall transform these protected areas. What happens to the twin issues of sustainability and environmental renewal?
The Bureau, however, also cites other eligible applicants to SAPAs. They include the indigenous peoples (IPs) and “tenured migrant communities”. Individually or in groups, they can also apply for SAPA tenurial certificates for “special uses”.
The truth is that all these protected areas are already populated. The original forest inhabitants, mostly IPs, are steadily being outnumbered by the landless and jobless migrants from the lowlands. The DENR made a good decision to adopt the “rainforestation” concept in the conceptualization and implementation of the NGP. As developed by the Visayas State University and demonstrated in practice by Haribon, rainforestation calls for the transformation of forest dwellers into forest keepers. Through the NGP, the communities in the watershed areas have been transformed into partners in the development of tree nurseries, planting of seedlings in areas delineated by DENR field staff and maintenance of the forests and the newly-planted areas. If there are reports of failure of greening in some areas, blame this on the usual culprit – corruption among some government personnel and “cooperating” community organizations.
This brings us to a bigger development challenge facing the office of DENR Secretary Cimatu: How to develop and institute a holistic and integrated program of land management and environmental care for the protected areas based on the framework of the existing NIPAs law.
First and foremost among the policy issues is how to secure the ancestral domain rights of the IPs. Numbering over a hundred, the various IP tribes or communities are claiming around 2.5 million hectares of their ancestral domain under the IP Reform Act of 1997. In some watershed areas, there are already conflicts with the poor migrants over land usage and “land boundaries” for farms and housing. There have also been bloody incidents involving mining and quarrying companies. With the arrival of new SAPA investors, conflicts are likely to multiply.
Another issue is how to deal with the migrants, who have been pouring into the forestlands in waves through the decades and building virtually semi-permanent or permanent communities, some of which have already been recognized by the LGUs as sitios or even barangays. These communities have been growing in terms of population just like what is happening in the lowlands. Many do not even understand that there is such a thing as a SAPA program.
This is why the old provision of the Revised Forestry Code, issued as Presidential Decree No. 705 in 1975 by the unlamented regime of President Ferdinand Marcos, on the importance of having a comprehensive and reliable survey and inventory of public lands remains timely and relevant. Section 52 of the Code provides for the following:
“A complete census of kaingineros, squatters, cultural minorities and other occupants and residents in forest lands with or without authority or permits from the government, showing the extent of their respective occupation and the resulting damage, or impairment of forest resources, shall be conducted.”
We still have to see or be informed of the existence of a DENR census or comprehensive report on the various occupants of public lands. Thus, before the full operation of the SAPA program, it is incumbent on the DENR to tell the public what is really the situation on the ground.
Ultimately, what is needed is a comprehensive development or re-development program for the protected areas and the whole forestry sector of the country. The SAPA program should be defined or delineated based on the requirements of the nation for an inclusive, pro-poor and ecologically-sustainable program of forest management. A recommendation to Secretary Cimatu: Please conduct public consultations on the SAPA program and other issues involving the protected areas.